FW: Proposed Script tag additions

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Hi Behdad, John, all,

It is true that the ISO standards cannot be changed at will and that one has to follow the established process, but it doesn’t mean that a worthy change should not be made just to avoid the extra work. I agree with John that adding script and language shaping specs to the OFF standard would be a major benefit and an important step towards creating the missing text layout specification. It is a lot of work but it would be worthwhile, in my opinion.

You are right in your observation that some of the existing shaping specs are buggy, but adding them to the OFF would also offer us an opportunity to fix those bugs. This is where the ISO process becomes really helpful since it is designed to ensure that sufficient amount of time is allocated for the development of the standard, and that everybody has a chance to review the drafts and contribute their comments and/or corrections. So, the real question is whether we believe there is a real benefit in adding layout specification to OFF, and if yes, the existing shaping specifications may be a good starting point. The process should not be seen as a deterrent to doing something needed and useful.

Best regards,
Vlad


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Behdad Esfahbod [mailto:behdad.esfahbod at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Behdad Esfahbod
> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 1:09 PM
> To: Levantovsky, Vladimir
> Cc: Mansour, Kamal; John Hudson; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: FW: Proposed Script tag additions
> 
> Hi Vladimir,
> 
> You are right.   The OpenType spec as is, is only a file format
> specification.
>  If one looks hard one can get a feel of how this data is supposed to
> be used,
> but there's a lot more that can be documented.  And I agree that the
> script-specific specs are independent of the file format and part of
> the
> broader text-layout specification yet to be written.
> 
> Given how hard it is to change the ISO OFF, I don't agree with John
> that
> adding the current incomplete and buggy script specs would be
> worthwhile.
> 
> behdad
> 
> On 12/03/10 11:38, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
> > Hello Behdad, all,
> >
> > Apologies for the delayed response. The shaping of Syriac that you're
> referring to is a part of the different specification that is related
> to OT/OFF. Since it's not the part of the "OFF proper", it cannot be
> part of the ISO OFF amendment, but your proposal does bring up the
> important issue to consider - do we want language-specific shaping
> specification be kept "as is" (i.e. as separate specifications), or
> would be useful and reasonable to make them part of the ISO OFF
> standard, e.g. add them as annexes to establish a compliance point for
> text layout engine implementations?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Vladimir
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Behdad Esfahbod [mailto:behdad.esfahbod at gmail.com] On Behalf
> Of
> >> Behdad Esfahbod
> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 2:00 PM
> >> To: Levantovsky, Vladimir
> >> Cc: Mansour, Kamal; John Hudson; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
> >> Subject: Re: FW: Proposed Script tag additions
> >>
> >> Hi Vlad,
> >>
> >> At this time I would like to propose a fix to the Syriac OpenType
> >> standard only.
> >>
> >>   https://www.microsoft.com/typography/otfntdev/syriacot/shaping.htm
> >>
> >> The most urgent fix being:
> >>
> >> Instead of: "g. Apply feature 'med2' to replace the 'Alaph' glyph in
> >> the
> >> middle of Syriac words when the preceding base character cannot be
> >> joined to."
> >>
> >> it should say: "g. Apply feature 'med2' to replace the 'Alaph' glyph
> in
> >> the
> >> middle of Syriac words when the preceding base character can be
> joined
> >> to."
> >>
> >> That is, should read "can be joined to" instead of "cannot be joined
> >> to".  For
> >> details see:
> >>
> >>   http://behdad.org/syriac/
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> behdad
> >>
> >>